MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Association between daylight saving time transitions and myocardial infarction : a canadian retrospective single-center study

2025· article· en· W7127596102 on OpenAlexaffabout
S Tremblay-Perreault, M N Nguyen, S L Lepage

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCircadian rhythm and melatonin
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyocardial infarctionIncidence (geometry)Poisson regressionMyocardial infarction diagnosisCircadian rhythmRetrospective cohort studyDaylight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Daylight saving time (DST) transitions disrupt circadian rhythms, potentially influencing cardiovascular events. European studies have demonstrated a modest increase in myocardial infarction (MI) risk following DST transitions, particularly after the spring transition. These findings prompted the European Parliament to recommend abolishing DST, though the initiative was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. North American studies, however, have reported conflicting results regarding DST’s association with MI incidence. To our knowledge, there is no Canadian studies on the subject. Objective To evaluate whether the incidence of myocardial infarction changes significantly during the week following DST transitions in spring and fall within a Canadian population. Methods This retrospective, single-center study analyzed data from 49,669 patients admitted for MI (STEMI, NSTEMI) at our center between January 2000 and January 2020. MI incidence during the week following DST transitions was compared to the rest of the year using Poisson regression models, with adjustments for temporal trends, day of the week, and meteorological factors such as mean temperature. Results The study found a non-significant 4% increase in MI incidence during the week following the spring DST transition (Incidence Rate Ratio [IRR]: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.93–1.15; p = 0.50) and a non-significant 4% decrease following the fall transition (IRR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.86–1.08; p = 0.50). While there was numerically more MI in the week following spring transition and less MI following the fall transition, it did not reach statistical significance. Additional analyses examining 1-day, 3-day, and 7-day periods post-DST transitions revealed a similar trend but remained non-significant. Subgroup analyses based on age, gender, and MI type revealed no notable differences. Analyses restricted to data after 2007, accounting for national changes in DST timing and ICD classifications, also demonstrated no significant associations. Conclusion In this large retrospective single-center study, no significant association was observed between DST transitions and MI incidence. These findings suggest that DST transitions do not represent a substantial cardiovascular risk in the studied population. Future large-scale studies are needed to validate these findings and explore potential broader health impacts of DST in Canada.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCircadian rhythm and melatonin→French-language works237,207→